More Kevin C & Larry G
First some Neo-Con bashing from Kevin Carson's blog...
Monday, June 13, 2005
A (Partial) Neoconservative Lexicon
Neocon. Code word for Jews like Jeanne Kirkpatrick, Bill Bennett, and Scoop Jackson.
Moral Relativism. Aka historicism. The denial of any unified, objective standard of value. The diametric opposite of Moral Equivalence (q.v.).
Moral Equivalence. Judgment of the United States government by the same unified, objective standard of value as the governments of other countries. The diametric opposite of Moral Relativism (q.v.).
Moral Clarity. The Zen-like state of mind from which it is possible accuse the same political enemy, simultaneously, of both Moral Relativism and Moral Equivalence.
Elites. Latte-sipping, brie-eating, Volvo-driving, little magazine-reading, effete snobs who live on the coasts, whom it is entirely permissible to attack for their privileged lifestyle. Such attacks are entirely different from the heinous crime of Class Warfare (q.v.), which no decent person will engage in.
Class Warfare. Demagogic attacks based on the entirely specious ground of unearned wealth, a sin up with which the neocons will not put. Entirely different from demagogic attacks based on cultural characteristics like the kind of food and entertainment one likes (see Elites).
Blame America First. Blame the lying, mendacious gang of swine in Washington and Wall Street who own most of America, and who claim to speak and act on behalf of the people who actually live and work in this country.
Now some comments on the no votes to the EU Constitution from Larry Gambone's blog:
Monday, May 30, 2005
A VICTORY AGAINST TYRANNY
As you all know, the French voted against the EU Constitution by a significant margin. Trade unions and other popular movements campaigned hard against a yes vote and were pleased to succeed. With the presumed rejection by Dutch voters in a couple of days, the Constitution should be a dead fish. Contrary to the pimp media, which is whining about “the selfish French”, what angered the left is not the European Federation, but the reactionary neoconservative economics smuggled into the Constitution. The French do not wish to have their living standards further destroyed and the EU turned into a carbon copy of the USA.
A little background on this. Not content with having the UK as its Trojan horse, US imperialism cultivated gangster capitalism in the ex- Eastern Block countries. Rather than converting Stalinist state capitalism into social democracy as many Europeans wished, the US imposed its “crash course” in so-called free markets which enabled some former apparachiks to grab huge chunks state of state property converting themselves into a particularly nasty breed of capitalist. Eastern European countries ruled by such capitalists promote neoconservative economics as well as pandering to the US attack on Iraq.
The idea was to lower the EU to the level of Eastern Europe, thereby shifting much German, Italian and French investments East and fattening the pockets of both the local greed creeps, as well as enriching the Western capitalists with cheap-labor and poor working standards. Now that the French (And soon the Dutch) have rejected this pig in a poke, this scam seems a lot less likely to be pulled off.
Hopefully the victory of the popular movements will encourage further revolt, both in France and in the rest of Europe. The Europeans need a “hot summer.”
Tuesday, May 31, 2005
FALL OUT FROM THE NO VOTE
The French Business Federation is crying about the No vote. They wanted to impose Thatcherism across France, which they claim would increase employment. (As though that were their main concern and not profits!) British unemployment figures (5.2%) are contrasted with France (10.3%) In terms of working class living standards these figures might not mean much. If most of the “extra” jobs in the UK are minimum wage or are of a precarious nature, then the only people to benefit are the rich minority who hire these slaves. Workers may well be better off on the dole in France than working for peanuts in the UK. There is also the problem of how that low unemployment came about - and this is certainly frightening to the average French worker. Thatcherism devastated scores of communities and ruined thousands of lives. In the heyday of the Iron Lady - in the 1980's - the unemployment rate in the UK was 12% and France only 2%. Hundreds of thousands of real jobs - i.e. making things - were destroyed and these were replaced by McJobs. Is this what the French workers want? Sure, stagnation is a drag, but the deliberate creation of misery is far worse.
The same is also said about Canada - our employment rate is always higher than the US. But who in their right mind would trade the Canadian situation for that of the American worker? US workers work longer, have far less vacation time, are overwhelmingly non-union, their UI is even worse than here, and in most states, thanks to the totalitarian "at will" law have no rights whatsoever.( See my Blog, March 23 for information on the evil "at will" law)
Some commentators have said that while “the French” find the Constitution too Thatcherite, “the British” find it too social. How do these commentators know what “the British” think? And which “British” ? Opposition to the constitution in France was working class. Would workers in the UK be much different in that regard? Perhaps this claim about what the British think is linked to the fact the progressive opposition in the UK does not have the resources that the French opponents have. The reason for this is that France is in many ways a more libertarian society than Britain. The authoritarian “first past the post” electoral system excludes all those Greens, Communists, and Trots who make up an important part of the opposition. The democratic press laws make sure that opposition papers get a wide circulation. French political parties are not petty dictatorships, thus Fabius and Hollande of the Socialist Party took opposite positions on the referendum, without the bullying, threats and expulsions that such opposition would incur within the Labour Party. (Think only of what the Blairites did to George Galloway for opposing the conquest of Iraq.)
Kevin Carson points out in the comments section of the previous article on the EU referendum, that while he is pleased for the Europeans, a weakened EU is not as strong a rival to US imperialism. I agree that the US should not be able to totally dominate the world and that a block composed of the EU, Russia and Latin America, would be a good thing. But the EU would be a much better rival to the US if it also provided a different model of society. The present Constitution was an attempt to import US style capitalism into Europe. The popular forces are pushing to create that alternative Europe, it might take a while to succeed and defeat the neocon reaction, but if it does, the whole world will turn to Europe and the US State and its corporate creatures will be in for a real shock.
Monday, June 13, 2005
A (Partial) Neoconservative Lexicon
Neocon. Code word for Jews like Jeanne Kirkpatrick, Bill Bennett, and Scoop Jackson.
Moral Relativism. Aka historicism. The denial of any unified, objective standard of value. The diametric opposite of Moral Equivalence (q.v.).
Moral Equivalence. Judgment of the United States government by the same unified, objective standard of value as the governments of other countries. The diametric opposite of Moral Relativism (q.v.).
Moral Clarity. The Zen-like state of mind from which it is possible accuse the same political enemy, simultaneously, of both Moral Relativism and Moral Equivalence.
Elites. Latte-sipping, brie-eating, Volvo-driving, little magazine-reading, effete snobs who live on the coasts, whom it is entirely permissible to attack for their privileged lifestyle. Such attacks are entirely different from the heinous crime of Class Warfare (q.v.), which no decent person will engage in.
Class Warfare. Demagogic attacks based on the entirely specious ground of unearned wealth, a sin up with which the neocons will not put. Entirely different from demagogic attacks based on cultural characteristics like the kind of food and entertainment one likes (see Elites).
Blame America First. Blame the lying, mendacious gang of swine in Washington and Wall Street who own most of America, and who claim to speak and act on behalf of the people who actually live and work in this country.
Now some comments on the no votes to the EU Constitution from Larry Gambone's blog:
Monday, May 30, 2005
A VICTORY AGAINST TYRANNY
As you all know, the French voted against the EU Constitution by a significant margin. Trade unions and other popular movements campaigned hard against a yes vote and were pleased to succeed. With the presumed rejection by Dutch voters in a couple of days, the Constitution should be a dead fish. Contrary to the pimp media, which is whining about “the selfish French”, what angered the left is not the European Federation, but the reactionary neoconservative economics smuggled into the Constitution. The French do not wish to have their living standards further destroyed and the EU turned into a carbon copy of the USA.
A little background on this. Not content with having the UK as its Trojan horse, US imperialism cultivated gangster capitalism in the ex- Eastern Block countries. Rather than converting Stalinist state capitalism into social democracy as many Europeans wished, the US imposed its “crash course” in so-called free markets which enabled some former apparachiks to grab huge chunks state of state property converting themselves into a particularly nasty breed of capitalist. Eastern European countries ruled by such capitalists promote neoconservative economics as well as pandering to the US attack on Iraq.
The idea was to lower the EU to the level of Eastern Europe, thereby shifting much German, Italian and French investments East and fattening the pockets of both the local greed creeps, as well as enriching the Western capitalists with cheap-labor and poor working standards. Now that the French (And soon the Dutch) have rejected this pig in a poke, this scam seems a lot less likely to be pulled off.
Hopefully the victory of the popular movements will encourage further revolt, both in France and in the rest of Europe. The Europeans need a “hot summer.”
Tuesday, May 31, 2005
FALL OUT FROM THE NO VOTE
The French Business Federation is crying about the No vote. They wanted to impose Thatcherism across France, which they claim would increase employment. (As though that were their main concern and not profits!) British unemployment figures (5.2%) are contrasted with France (10.3%) In terms of working class living standards these figures might not mean much. If most of the “extra” jobs in the UK are minimum wage or are of a precarious nature, then the only people to benefit are the rich minority who hire these slaves. Workers may well be better off on the dole in France than working for peanuts in the UK. There is also the problem of how that low unemployment came about - and this is certainly frightening to the average French worker. Thatcherism devastated scores of communities and ruined thousands of lives. In the heyday of the Iron Lady - in the 1980's - the unemployment rate in the UK was 12% and France only 2%. Hundreds of thousands of real jobs - i.e. making things - were destroyed and these were replaced by McJobs. Is this what the French workers want? Sure, stagnation is a drag, but the deliberate creation of misery is far worse.
The same is also said about Canada - our employment rate is always higher than the US. But who in their right mind would trade the Canadian situation for that of the American worker? US workers work longer, have far less vacation time, are overwhelmingly non-union, their UI is even worse than here, and in most states, thanks to the totalitarian "at will" law have no rights whatsoever.( See my Blog, March 23 for information on the evil "at will" law)
Some commentators have said that while “the French” find the Constitution too Thatcherite, “the British” find it too social. How do these commentators know what “the British” think? And which “British” ? Opposition to the constitution in France was working class. Would workers in the UK be much different in that regard? Perhaps this claim about what the British think is linked to the fact the progressive opposition in the UK does not have the resources that the French opponents have. The reason for this is that France is in many ways a more libertarian society than Britain. The authoritarian “first past the post” electoral system excludes all those Greens, Communists, and Trots who make up an important part of the opposition. The democratic press laws make sure that opposition papers get a wide circulation. French political parties are not petty dictatorships, thus Fabius and Hollande of the Socialist Party took opposite positions on the referendum, without the bullying, threats and expulsions that such opposition would incur within the Labour Party. (Think only of what the Blairites did to George Galloway for opposing the conquest of Iraq.)
Kevin Carson points out in the comments section of the previous article on the EU referendum, that while he is pleased for the Europeans, a weakened EU is not as strong a rival to US imperialism. I agree that the US should not be able to totally dominate the world and that a block composed of the EU, Russia and Latin America, would be a good thing. But the EU would be a much better rival to the US if it also provided a different model of society. The present Constitution was an attempt to import US style capitalism into Europe. The popular forces are pushing to create that alternative Europe, it might take a while to succeed and defeat the neocon reaction, but if it does, the whole world will turn to Europe and the US State and its corporate creatures will be in for a real shock.
posted by Anglonoel | 4:17 pm
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home